NASIM SIKANDAR, J.---This is a case stated by the Lahore Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The following question has been referred for our consideration and answer:--- "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Tribunal was justified in maintaining the deletion of penalty imposed under section 111 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 merely because the additional assessment was completed in agreement with the assessee."
2. After hearing the learned counsel we will agree with the learned counsel for the respondent- assessee that the legal proposition in hand already stands answered by us in the affirmative in C.T.R. No.362 of 1991 re: CIT v. Muhammad Hanif. As in the present case the assessee in that reference agreed to be assessed at a certain income and thereafter he was burdened with penalty under section 111 of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979 on the ground of his having concealed the true particular of his income. While expressing ourselves on the issue we explained that an agreed assessm ent had to be taken as package deal and every term of the agreement clearly stated.
Further that in case the terms of the agreement did not provide for initiation of penalty proceedings and even in absence of mention of such proceedings will not permit the Assessing Officer to use the admission made by an assessee against him. Admittedly no amount of penalty was either settled at the time of settlement nor the assessee was properly informed of the contemplated proceedings.
3. That being so we will agree with the learned Tribunal that the departmental appeal before them against the deletion of penalty by the A.C. Was frivolous.
4. For the various other reasons as discussed in detail in C.T.R. No.362 of 1991, decided on 20-11-2000 our answer to the question is in the affirmative. .